Attorney General Sues Pfizer for Misrepresenting COVID-19 Vax Efficacy and Conspiring an

William Makis a Nuclear Radiologist that ran one of the largest and successful clinical trial ton European approved "isotope" for treatment of certain cancers through Alberta Health Services has collected the largest amount of data on what he calls Turbo Cancers.

His research was cut short and sold to a private company in BC Canada and is now available for over $100k privately to foreigners.

AHS paid him $40k a month to keep quiet about it but after he put it all together he's taken them to court. They've bullied him and taken his license away. All the documentation that confirms this has been filed in the courts and he presents in his podcasts.

No one ever wants to challenge his evidence. It's always ad hom attacks, which seems to be the norm when one cannot challenge the evidence.

 

I'm a pathologist, so my role is more about recognizing cancer under the microscope. It's true an oncologist gets more into the mechanisms of carcinogenesis as part of their practice, but they would tell you the same thing.

 

That's pretty funny because neither the oncologist nor the ENT surgeon or radiation Dr. said what you claim. Maybe they just forgot to agree with you or something?

Plus she has had 3 different cancer types

 

Said what? That the covid vaccine caused her cancer? Really? lol... Don't confuse politeness with agreement, though. But if they really agree with you I guess there is variation in doctors. Some prominent anti-vaxxers are actually pathologists, ironically enough. Appeal to authority has its limitations, but you're the one who brought up credentials.

 

He speaks too much truth for a man like you.

 

Pfizer moves in TX v Pfizer - by Sasha Latypova (substack.com)

If this link works, you can read Pfizer's recent response in that lawsuit. They say they were just working for DoD making countermeasures for the engineered virus. For that they are entitled to immunity as a contractor for government programs. Some element of truth to that, showing how rotten things are in the US.

 

No that's not what I claimed that's what you claimed.

But I'll leave it to you internet experts to diagnose from a distance

 

This is where you are definitely wrong. It's not "hard to know" if they are investigating any effect of the vaccine. They aren't.

How do I know that? Because they vaccinated 75-80% of my fellow citizens, and I can talk to them. In 4 years, I've yet to meet one person who can confirm that a medical professional or scientist followed up with them after the shot. Absolutely no one called anyone Ive ever met. There was no attempt to gather information on the effects of the vaccine whatsoever. No surveys. If you told your doctor about something that you thought might be an effect, you were looked at with scorn and ridicule. If you posted your complaint on social media, no matter how respectfully you worded it, you were censored by the US government through those corporations.

It's obvious that they have no desire to learn the possible effects of pushing their products on most of the world. An altruistic group interested in helping humanity would have done the exact opposite.

 

You misread what I said. I said it's hard to know if they AREN'T investigating.

In other words, hard to know X if they aren't investigating X. Therefore to say that X it is not happening is just a guess because X is not being actively investigated, and it should be given the numerous problems with the vaccine, from not being able to stop transmission, death, and causing a plethora of other conditions which is now more than well documented in the literature and even Pfizers own documents which they wanted to conceal for 75 years.



https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/com/CSSC-0A12/PHOLEEPAB2-2469/submissions/00000615.pdf

A documented 2% fatality

Most people are now seeing effects in their own family and friends...

I know of several myocarditis, CHF and even a heart attack in a 17 year old who was perfectly fit and athletic 2 weeks after a booster. The hospital where my mother was getting treated for her heart failure, only diagnosed 1 week after her second shot (myocarditis) and 1 months after her booster (CHF) was over loaded in their cardio ward just this past October, a month after most people received their booster.

So we can just stick to the facts above, 2% fatality is documented in Pfizer's own research.

 

They already know the harms caused by the shots. That's why they attempted to cover up the many harms they saw in the limited testing. Thank God for 1 honorable judge that forced Pfizer to release that data. Pfizer wanted to keep it secret for 70+ years, like they did with JFK information.

Crimes were committed on purpose. Public Health was NOT the goal.

 

Yes but as you said in another post your body was holding it at bay until the jab.

HomeMolecular GeneticsBiological ScienceGeneticsBase Pairing
.
Speicher DJ et al, DNA fragments detected in COVID-19 vaccines in Canada. DNA fragments detected in monovalent and bivalent

October 2023

Authors:
David Jeremiah Speicher
Redeemer University
Jessica Rose
Independent Researcher
Luz Maria Gutschi
David M Wiseman

Background: In vitro transcription (IVT) reactions used to generate nucleoside modified RNA (modRNA) for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines currently rely on an RNA polymerase transcribing from a DNA template. Production of modRNA used in the original Pfizer randomized clinical trial (RCT) utilized a PCR-generated DNA template (Process 1). To generate billions of vaccine doses, this DNA was cloned into a bacterial plasmid vector for amplification in Escherichia coli before linearization (Process 2), expanding the size and complexity of potential residual DNA and introducing sequences not present in the Process 1 template. It appears that Moderna used a similar plasmid-based process for both clinical trial and post-trial use vaccines. Recently, DNA sequencing studies have revealed this plasmid DNA at significant levels in both Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna modRNA vaccines. These studies surveyed a limited number of lots and questions remain regarding the variance in residual DNA observed internationally. Methods: Using previously published primer and probe sequences, quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and Qubit® fluorometry was performed on an additional 27 mRNA vials obtained in Canada and drawn from 12 unique lots (5 lots of Moderna child/adult monovalent, 1 lot of Moderna adult bivalent BA.4/5, 1 lot of Moderna child/adult bivalent BA.1, 1 lot of Moderna XBB.1.5 monovalent, 3 lots of Pfizer adult monovalent, and 1 lot of Pfizer adult bivalent BA.4/5). The Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database was queried for the number and categorization of adverse events (AEs) reported for each of the lots tested. The content of one previously studied vial of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine was examined by Oxford Nanopore sequencing to determine the size distribution of DNA fragments. This sample was also used to determine if the residual DNA is packaged in the lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) and thus resistant to DNaseI or if the DNA resides outside of the LNP and is DNaseI labile. Results: Quantification cycle (Cq) values (1:10 dilution) for the plasmid origin of replication (ori) and spike sequences ranged from 18.44 - 24.87 and 18.03 - 23.83 and for Pfizer, and 22.52 – 24.53 and 25.24 – 30.10 for Moderna, respectively. These values correspond to 0.28 – 4.27 ng/dose and 0.22 - 2.43 ng/dose (Pfizer), and 0.01 -0.34 ng/dose and 0.25 – 0.78 ng/dose (Moderna), for ori and spike respectively measured by qPCR, and 1,896 – 3,720 ng/dose and 3,270 – 5,100 ng/dose measured by Qubit® fluorometry for Pfizer and Moderna, respectfully. The SV40 promoter-enhancer-ori was only detected in Pfizer vials with Cq scores ranging from 16.64 – 22.59. In an exploratory analysis, we found preliminary evidence of a dose response relationship of the amount of DNA per dose and the frequency of serious adverse events (SAEs). This relationship was different for the Pfizer and Moderna products. Size distribution analysis found mean and maximum DNA fragment lengths of 214 base pairs (bp) and 3.5 kb, respectively. The plasmid DNA is likely inside the LNPs and is protected from nucleases.

Conclusion:
These data demonstrate the presence of billions to hundreds of billions of DNA molecules per dose in these vaccines. Using fluorometry, all vaccines exceed the guidelines for residual DNA set by FDA and WHO of 10 ng/dose by 188 – 509-fold. However, qPCR residual DNA content in all vaccines were below these guidelines emphasizing the importance of methodological clarity and consistency when interpreting quantitative guidelines. The preliminary evidence of a dose-response effect of residual DNA measured with qPCR and SAEs warrant confirmation and further investigation. Our findings extend existing concerns about vaccine safety and call into question the relevance of guidelines conceived before the introduction of efficient transfection using LNPs. With several obvious limitations, we urge that our work is replicated under forensic conditions and that guidelines be revised to account for highly efficient DNA transfection and cumulative dosing.

Vials of COVID-19 vaccine from Ontario, Canada: (A) Pfizer/BioNTech 132 BNT162b2 adult monovalent and bivalent; Moderna Spikevax mRNA-1273 (B) adult 133 monovalent XBB.1.5, (C) child/adult monovalent, (D) child/adult bivalent Wuhan-BA.1 134 and (E) child/adult bivalent Wuhan-BA.1 and adult Wuhan-bivalent BA.4/5. 135 136 qPCR Analysis of Spike, ori, and the SV40 Promoter-Enhancer-ori DNA 137 Each vial was tested by quantitative PCR (qPCR) for the presence of plasmid derived 138 SARS-CoV-2 spike, ori, and the SV40 promoter-enhancer-ori DNA. Spike and plasmid 139 ori were tested in duplicate with PCR primers targeting sequences shared by the Moderna 140 and Pfizer expression plasmids (Table 1). The uniplex SV40 Enhancer assay was 141 designed to amplify the nuclear targeting sequence unique to the Pfizer vector 6 . In brief, 142 the qPCR assays used 1 µL from each vial directly added to 17.8 µL of master mix. qPCR 143 kits were sourced from Medicinal Genomics (Part# 420201, Beverly, USA) with the 144 master mix containing 8.8 µL reaction consisting of 3.8 µL polymerase enzyme, 0.8 µL 145 reaction buffer and 1.0 µL of Primer-Probe mix, and 12.2 µL of ddH20. The Primer-Probe 146 mix was assembled using 12.5 µL 100 µM ori probe, 12.5 µL of 100 µM spike probe, 25 147 µL of 100 µM spike forward primer, 25 µL of 100 µM spike reverse primer, 25 µL of 100 148 µM ori forward primer, 25 µL 100 µM ori reverse primer, and 75 µL of ddH20. 149

Vials of COVID-19 vaccine from Ontario, Canada: (A) Pfizer/BioNTech 132 BNT162b2 adult monovalent and bivalent; Moderna Spikevax mRNA-1273 (B) adult 133 monovalent XBB.1.5, (C) child/adult monovalent, (D) child/adult bivalent Wuhan-BA.1 134 and (E) child/adult bivalent Wuhan-BA.1 and adult Wuhan-bivalent BA.4/5. 135 136 qPCR Analysis of Spike, ori, and the SV40 Promoter-Enhancer-ori DNA 137 Each vial was tested by quantitative PCR (qPCR) for the presence of plasmid derived 138 SARS-CoV-2 spike, ori, and the SV40 promoter-enhancer-ori DNA. Spike and plasmid 139 ori were tested in duplicate with PCR primers targeting sequences shared by the Moderna 140 and Pfizer expression plasmids (Table 1). The uniplex SV40 Enhancer assay was 141 designed to amplify the nuclear targeting sequence unique to the Pfizer vector 6 . In brief, 142 the qPCR assays used 1 µL from each vial directly added to 17.8 µL of master mix. qPCR 143 kits were sourced from Medicinal Genomics (Part# 420201, Beverly, USA) with the 144 master mix containing 8.8 µL reaction consisting of 3.8 µL polymerase enzyme, 0.8 µL 145 reaction buffer and 1.0 µL of Primer-Probe mix, and 12.2 µL of ddH20. The Primer-Probe 146 mix was assembled using 12.5 µL 100 µM ori probe, 12.5 µL of 100 µM spike probe, 25 147 µL of 100 µM spike forward primer, 25 µL of 100 µM spike reverse primer, 25 µL of 100 148 µM ori forward primer, 25 µL 100 µM ori reverse primer, and 75 µL of ddH20. 149
…
Calibration curves of Spike (red) and ori (blue) diluted 10-fold and tested by 273 qPCR. 274 For individual vials, qPCR on Pfizer amplified at a similar time for spike, ori, and SV40 275 enhancer-promoter-ori (ΔCq 1.48 ± 0.32) (Figure 3). Apart from Pfizer lot: FX4343, the 276 inter vial difference was small for both Pfizer (spike Cq 16.91 ± 0.52; ori Cq 16.91 ± 1.07; 277 SV40 promoter-enhancer-ori Cq 15.46 ± 2.02) and Moderna (spike Cq 20.35 ± 0.65; ori 278 Cq 25.34 ± 1.47) (values were based on the undiluted vials contents) (Table 2, Figure 4) 279 280 However, for all Moderna vials, except lot AS0467D, ori consistently amplified Cq 5-6 281 later than spike. The SV40 promoter-enhancer-ori was detected in all Pfizer vials but in 282 none of the Moderna vials. 283

Calibration curves of Spike (red) and ori (blue) diluted 10-fold and tested by 273 qPCR. 274 For individual vials, qPCR on Pfizer amplified at a similar time for spike, ori, and SV40 275 enhancer-promoter-ori (ΔCq 1.48 ± 0.32) (Figure 3). Apart from Pfizer lot: FX4343, the 276 inter vial difference was small for both Pfizer (spike Cq 16.91 ± 0.52; ori Cq 16.91 ± 1.07; 277 SV40 promoter-enhancer-ori Cq 15.46 ± 2.02) and Moderna (spike Cq 20.35 ± 0.65; ori 278 Cq 25.34 ± 1.47) (values were based on the undiluted vials contents) (Table 2, Figure 4) 279 280 However, for all Moderna vials, except lot AS0467D, ori consistently amplified Cq 5-6 281 later than spike. The SV40 promoter-enhancer-ori was detected in all Pfizer vials but in 282 none of the Moderna vials. 283
…
Amplification plot of all Pfizer (A) and Moderna (B) vials showing that spike (red) 289 and ori (blue) amplified similarly for individual vials of Pfizer. In Moderna, inter-vial 290 variability was consistent, but spike amplified earlier than ori (ΔCq~6). 291
Amplification plot of all Pfizer (A) and Moderna (B) vials showing that spike (red) 289 and ori (blue) amplified similarly for individual vials of Pfizer. In Moderna, inter-vial 290 variability was consistent, but spike amplified earlier than ori (ΔCq~6). 291
…
Comparison of residual DNA content of spike (red) and ori (blue) and the total 308 number of adverse events (orange) reported to VAERS. The FDA and WHO regulatory 309 guideline of 10 ng/dose 13 14 for residual DNA is shown by a red dotted line. Vials are 310 sorted in descending order by DNA load of plasmid ori. Lower case letters at the end of 311 lot numbers indicate different vials of the same lot. The total number of AEs was 312 determined per lot and reproduced for each vial in the same lot. 313

Comparison of residual DNA content of spike (red) and ori (blue) and the total 308 number of adverse events (orange) reported to VAERS. The FDA and WHO regulatory 309 guideline of 10 ng/dose 13 14 for residual DNA is shown by a red dotted line. Vials are 310 sorted in descending order by DNA load of plasmid ori. Lower case letters at the end of 311 lot numbers indicate different vials of the same lot. The total number of AEs was 312 determined per lot and reproduced for each vial in the same lot. 313
…
qPCR amplification profiles from the serial dilutions (10-fold) of the three lots 315 containing the highest DNA loads (Pfizer lots: A, FN7934a; B, FN7934b; C, FM7380). 316 317 The amount of residual DNA varied substantially between lots (0.28 -4.27 ng/dose for 318 Pfizer ori, 0.22 -2.43 ng/dose for Pfizer spike, 0.01 -0.34 ng/dose for Moderna ori, 0.25-319 0.78 ng/dose for Moderna spike) when tested by qPCR. Fluorometer based 320 measurements (e.g., Qubit ® ) of the vaccines show 2,567 ± 618 ng/dose (range: 1,896 321 to 3,720 ng/dose) for Pfizer and 4,280 ± 593 ng/dose (range: 3,270 to 5,100 ng/dose) 322 for Moderna suggesting a high fraction of the DNA is under the size range of the qPCR 323 amplicons. 324 325 We plotted residual DNA values obtained by Qubit fluorometry against those obtained 326
+5

qPCR amplification profiles from the serial dilutions (10-fold) of the three lots 315 containing the highest DNA loads (Pfizer lots: A, FN7934a; B, FN7934b; C, FM7380). 316 317 The amount of residual DNA varied substantially between lots (0.28 -4.27 ng/dose for 318 Pfizer ori, 0.22 -2.43 ng/dose for Pfizer spike, 0.01 -0.34 ng/dose for Moderna ori, 0.25-319 0.78 ng/dose for Moderna spike) when tested by qPCR. Fluorometer based 320 measurements (e.g., Qubit ® ) of the vaccines show 2,567 ± 618 ng/dose (range: 1,896 321 to 3,720 ng/dose) for Pfizer and 4,280 ± 593 ng/dose (range: 3,270 to 5,100 ng/dose) 322 for Moderna suggesting a high fraction of the DNA is under the size range of the qPCR 323 amplicons. 324 325 We plotted residual DNA values obtained by Qubit fluorometry against those obtained 326
…

Conclusion
These data demonstrate the presence of billions to hundreds of billions of DNA537 molecules per dose in the modRNA COVID-19 products tested. Using fluorometry, all538 products tested exceeded the guidelines for residual DNA set by the FDA and WHO of539 10 ng/dose by 188 – 509-fold. However, qPCR detected residual DNA content in all540 products tested were below these guidelines emphasizing the importance of541 methodological clarity and consistency when interpreting quantitative guidelines. The Cq542 scores for the most recent XBB.1.5 Moderna vaccine suggest that DNA residues have543 not been reduced from previous vaccine versions.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication 374870815_Speicher_DJ_et_al_DNA_fragments_detected_in_COVID-19_vaccines_in_Canada_DNA_fragments_detected_in_monovalent_and_bivalent

 

The experts just sound like they make it up as they go along.

Then there's this, straight out of Kissinger's prodigy's mouth:

https://epoha.com.hr/2023/04/08/kla...ntrol-of-the-internet/?utm_source=pocket_list

The World Economic Forum (WEF) has announced it has recruited hundreds of thousands of “information warriors” to control the internet, policing social media and forums for “misinformation” and conspiracy content which will then be systematically shut down.

 

Sorry to hear about your girl friend's cancer. I'm a double cancer survivor myself so I understand some of what she went through from personal experience. Nevertheless, there is no reason to think the vaccine caused her cancer. Metastatic cancer like you describe doesn't develop in a few months. It takes a while. The swollen arm? Sure. It could be an allergic reaction. I had my injected arm hurt badly enough that I couldn't use it for nearly a week. That was the vaccine.

 

I think the problem is that government doctors live in a world of politics and politics corrupts in a big way. All of my doctors spoke privatly against what the government docs were saying. The government is not a good place to get medical advice. Side with the private sector doctors who actually practice medicine.

 

I didn't need to read the link unless you are admitting that your summation of the story is incorrect.

 

"developing dormantly"?

You do realize that is a oxymoron don't you.

Dormant literally means it is NOT developing. It is "dormant"

dor·mant
/ˈdôrm(ə)nt/
adjective

1. (of an animal) having normal physical functions suspended or slowed down for a period of time; in or as if in a deep sleep.
   "dormant butterflies"
2. temporarily inactive or inoperative.
   "that dormant urge to write fiction has re-emerged"

 

Though you are blissfully unaware of it, there are many thousands of reasons, documented all 'round the globe, to understand that the shots have an oncogenic effect. The new term is "turbo cancer", and dissenting medical experts all over the world are talking about it. Just because you are not aware of what's going on does not mean it's not happening.

 

And just because some doctors are talking about doesn't mean it IS happening or, if it is happening, that it is any way connected to the vaccine.

 

So it's normal to get the second vaccine and have your arm swell up the size of a baseball immediately, get a sore throat the very same day that starts turning into lumps to develop into cancer.....


It is more of a logical conclusion that the vaccine appears to have been involved then to say that all of that was just a big coincidence.

This vaccine cult really is true believers.

 

And just because you say it doesn't mean it is happening. I like the name though. One day we may get a "hyperspeed cancer."

 

There should be an investigation in who allowed tax payer dollars to be used for its development and perhaps jail time be involved.

 

True believers, never thinkers.

 

I think Warpspeed Cancer would be more appropriate.

 

I wouldn't. I know from personal experience the speed at which cancer progresses.

 

Have you been paying attention lately? It's everywhere, especially in youngsters. Thanks, Dr. Fauci and Pharma. Mark Crispin Miller (at Substack) and Dr. Makis of Canada have been keeping track. It's astounding. Some of the batches were oncogenic.